Studio 360 Challenge: Redesign Valentine’s Day

In mid-January, on the generous recommendation of fellow design chronicler Alissa Walker, Bryony and I were invited by Studio 360 — the beloved Public Radio International show hosted by Kurt Andersen — to tackle a rather interesting problem: Redesigning Valentine’s Day, everything from the hearts, to the roses, to the chocolates, to the expensive dinners, to Cupid. Everything we know about Valentine’s was due for a new approach. Now you might think, who would want to come up with this challenge in the first place? Well, Studio 360 has posed similar challenges in the past: Pentagram was asked to redesign Christmas in 2006 (in which I participated while employed there) and Worldstudio to redesign the gay flag in 2009. Of course, we said yes. Yes, to a project that we had to finish in less than two weeks, with no pay, and without any precedents to refer to. Regardless, we decided to approach it just as we would any identity or branding project. The results of this endeavor, along with the process that got us there, are shown below, and at Studio 360 you can listen to the presentation with our “client,” Mr. Andersen.

Defining the Problem

The hardest part was grasping the extent to which Valentine’s Day had become more obnoxious than enjoyable and finding glimmers of hope in the traditions of this holiday. Our first step was sitting down with our friends Jennifer Elsner and David Shields of Viewers Like You — both of whom shared with us being designers, ex-Brooklynites, married to each other and not celebrating Valentine’s — to have a discussion on the merits and demerits of this love-filled day. You can hear very small segments of this conversation here. Based on this hearty conversation and further reflection we established the following aspects of Valentine’s:

The Positive
Effusive with an intense display of affection in a single day.
Convenient with a predetermined palette of solutions.
Memorable with the potential for unique gestures.

The Negative
Generic with mass-produced, off-the-shelf solutions.
Divisive with the exclusion of singles.
Stressful with the pressure of getting the right token of affection.
Obnoxious with visual clichés of hearts and explosions of red.

Establishing our Goals

We can’t fix everything, so we decided to focus on five aspects.

Clarify expectations.
Simplify visual clutter.
Update color palette.
Revamp traditions.
Transform Cupid.

Goal No. 1: Clarify expectations

Sorry single people, this day is not for you. Father’s Day isn’t for mothers and Mother’s Day isn’t for fathers… you have Spring Break, what else do you want?

Applies only to romantic love between two people, so if you want to celebrate friendship you will need to find another day.

Responsibility for displays of affection falls on both parties. Men screw up enough throughout the year to put the weight of a holiday on their shoulders.

On January 1st discuss with your partner whether you will celebrate Valentine’s Day. Sign a piece of paper if needed.

Goal No. 2: Simplify visual clutter

Among all the visual manifestations of Valentine’s, one stands apart as a recurring icon. The heart.

But the heart is not unique to Valentine’s Day.

By drawing from the heart’s symmetric anatomy and curved structure we arrive at a new, exclusive icon: The Valentine.

The Valentine stands for unity, simplicity, and partnership. It also makes the shape of a “V.”

The Valentine is as simple as other global icons.

It can be easily reinterpreted and adopted by anyone. (Your interpretation is welcome at this Flickr Group)

The Valentine can serve to indicate relationship status or romantic intentions depending on its orientation.

It lets your friends know whether you are “open” or “closed” for romantic business.

Goal No. 3: Update color palette

The primary color associated with Valentine’s Day is red, which is also the color for other significant icons.

The supporting color is pink, in many hues…yuck.

Since red can not be owned by Valentine’s and there is equity in pink, a viable solution is magenta, a vibrant, contemporary and strong color — it is also a default printing ink, yielding efficient and sustainable print production.

Magenta is coupled with a dark gray for a touch of seriousness and sophistication — overlaying these two colors creates a third one, burgundy.

The Valentine rendered in various combinations of the new color palette.

Goal No. 4: Revamp traditions

Tradition: The Valentine card
Offering a Valentine card as a display of affection has lost all sense of significance. Originally created by hand with meaningful materials and gestures, today’s mass-produced cards have lost all sense of romanticism. But how do you change people’s behavior to go back to Valentine’s roots?

Photo by Flickr user krossbow

Introducing The Valentine Card Tax regulated by federal, state, and local law. Applied to any Valentine card design produced in quantities of 1,000 or more. Yes… Hallmark and American Greetings, you are out of luck.

Leading to a return to one-of-a-kind Valentines.

If hand-made Valentine cards are not for you, get a silver marker and a stack of sticky notes branded with The Valentine, then use them to leave unexpected notes on Valentine’s Day and even throughout the year for your loved one to find.

Tradition: The roses
Sure, roses are pretty but a large percentage of the nearly 200 million sold in the U.S. on Valentine’s Day come all the way from Colombia — hello carbon footprint — harvested by workers in reportedly dire conditions and pay. Roses must go.

Instead, and to retain the connection to an object that grows from our earth, we suggest selecting from a range of more functional, lasting organic products that, ahem, are also powerful aphrodisiacs. Pictured: saffron, chili peppers, eggplant, ginger, durian, okra, and papaya.

Tradition: The chocolate
There is absolutely nothing wrong with chocolate on Valentine’s Day or any other day of the year. Banning it would be a crime. Chocolate… stays! (Abstain from enormous boxes though, it’s hard enough that most of us have already given up on New Year’s resolutions by this time.)

Goal No. 5: Transform Cupid

When it comes to other Holidays’ characters, Cupid just does not measure up. We would like to offer some alternatives. To do so, we asked three of our favorite illustrators to dream up possible replacements.

Chief Valentine Officer by Amanda Woodward
A more benevolent form of C-level executive, the CVO’s sole end-of-year bonus is the joy of procuring romantic love between two people, no matter how hard they are to bring together.

Heart Worm by Von Glitschka
On Valentine’s Day let your heart be infested with the Heart Worm. Its burrowing presence will give you passionate heart burn for the apple of your eye. Eat your heart out Cupid! Plus, it can flex into a number of helpful shapes.

The Love Puppy by Jessica Hische
Nothing sparks conversations between strangers — of both genders and all orientations — than a dog. This winged puppy rejects Cupid’s bow and arrow in favor of the Care Bears Stare, “in which the collected Bears stand together and radiate light from their respective tummy symbols. These combine to form a ray of love and good cheer which could bring care and joy into the target’s heart.”

An improvement?

It’s not perfect, but it’s a start. And, regardless of what you do or don’t do on Valentine’s, a simple “I love you” might be enough.

The Valentine Seeks Users

If you would like to use The Valentine icon, and we encourage you to, you may download it, print it, twist it, scribble it, whatever it.

Robert Smith’s comment is:

Great post!

The Love Puppy is amazing!

On Feb.12.2010 at 06:12 AM

Patrick Kulumba’s comment is:

Excellent! St V Day looks better to me now hihihi!

On Feb.12.2010 at 06:17 AM

Erwin’s comment is:

Excellent idea, and fun to see the process!

The logo is too much of a cross shape, you’d rather think of a mismatch than a healthy relationship. The worm I think is not a really lovable creature, since it is slimy and lives in the cold cold ground… But fun illustration though! And yes, the puppy is absolutely cute!

Most of all I would encourage people to be creative themselves, and give their own meaning to Valentines Day.

And Knicksfans should prepare themselves for bad news, a lot of hearts will be broken this summer!

On Feb.12.2010 at 06:26 AM

Leafy’s comment is:

I loved the logo, the magenta is well suited and vally letters FTW. But I don’t like the alternatives for the rest of them including how the logo can be used. Universal symbol should be kept as simplistic in meaning as possible, so “will you be my V” and “we are V” should suffice.

On Feb.12.2010 at 06:33 AM

Lucas von Gwinner’s comment is:

Nice idea. But the Logo reminds of http://www.meissen.com/ which is a very old and very traditional trademark.

On Feb.12.2010 at 06:59 AM

Plamen’s comment is:

Well, when I look at what you came up with I HAVE to think about the oldest continuously used trademark in the World - the “crossed swords” of Meissen porcelain…

On Feb.12.2010 at 07:03 AM

momo’s comment is:

Yeah, I also thought of crossed swords. And then crossed bones, like on the Jolly Roger.

On Feb.12.2010 at 07:09 AM

buruno’s comment is:

Loved the process and solution. Kudos to you and your chaps!

On Feb.12.2010 at 07:09 AM

Martin’s comment is:

Somehow the mark reminds of one of the oldest brands in Europe: Meissner Porcelain, a brand mark registered and protected since 1710:

On Feb.12.2010 at 07:15 AM

StockLogos’s comment is:

Everything is great. The process and the results. Congrats!

The logo does remind me of the Saudi Airlines swords but still like it.
http://www.airplane-pictures.net/images/uploaded-images/2006-9/23/886.jpg

On Feb.12.2010 at 07:18 AM

Joe Bloggs’s comment is:

Nope. Nothing new here, no clear communication. It’s a tough brief but I think there’s so much more potential.

On Feb.12.2010 at 07:21 AM

Andrew M’s comment is:

I love your process and thinking as much as the end result. If the majority of the world thought like designers then this would be a hit.

I doubt most people know the history of Valentine’s day and that cards were handmade. Then someone realized there was money to be made.

On Feb.12.2010 at 07:26 AM

Tim’s comment is:

The two swooshes (am I even allowed to say that withouth getting a C&D?) look weird. Like crossed scimitars. Or Lacrosse racqets. Or some kind of religious symbol (runes come to mind, too).

Why even base them on the form of a heart, when in the end it’s almost impossible to see where they came from? The connection seems to shaky to me. It’s too abstract, and the form seems so alienating and stand-offish.

In a way, this reminds me of the attempts of some brand agencies to overhaul age-old, well-known logos and replace them with something nobody gets. I can see why you wanted to move away from the heart, but, at least in my mind, it has become so connected to Valentine’s that morphing it into two crossing swords, sticks (whatever) is iconoclastic for no real reason.

I know I am overthinking something that is likely a joke (?), bear with me.

On Feb.12.2010 at 07:41 AM

Diane Faye Zerr’s comment is:

LOL! The Chief Valentine Officer, CVO kills me! And he’s holding a pink slip. Thank you for a good laugh on Friday morning.

The mark? Looks nothing like a V, It’s an X folks. As in ‘you’re gonna be my ex one day’ or for the single folks ‘I miss my ex because of this day’

Definitely like the color palette!

On Feb.12.2010 at 07:45 AM

sam’s comment is:

I think we’re all forgetting the true meaning of valentines…

the huge rise in rejection based suicides!

On Feb.12.2010 at 07:52 AM

Brendan’s comment is:

The roses don’t need to go…everything else is interesting!

I don’t know what the fuss is against the ‘V’ - it’s not like the heart looks like a heart anyways.

This was fun! Good read.

On Feb.12.2010 at 07:56 AM

Simon Seitz’s comment is:

Ditto: This icon looks like a pair of crossed swords. Meaning is completely lost. The heart is defined by it’s outline: two half-circles at the top and one point at the bottom. If the lines just wouldn’t cross at the bottom it could have been alright.

On Feb.12.2010 at 08:06 AM

jonathan’s comment is:

Sorry guys, I know this was a tough task, but I’m not getting any meaning from the icon at all. Simon’s bit about the heart - “two half circles reaching one point at the bottom”, that’s what love is about.

I just don’t feel any love here, more like two paths crossed. Good application and cohesiveness though. Happy V-Day!

On Feb.12.2010 at 08:27 AM

Derek Munn’s comment is:

I applaud the process but, it looks too sterile and apathetic for an icon that’s supposed to represent a day of romantic emotion. You sucked all the feeling right out of it with an esoteric interpretation of an already fine functioning icon.

On Feb.12.2010 at 08:35 AM

Bart’s comment is:

Nothing says “I love you” like a big X! :)

On Feb.12.2010 at 08:35 AM

550nm’s comment is:

thanks a lot for this amazing thoughts! faraway from all these cheesy stuff, this is just an excellent corporate identiy for the Valentine’s Day! i like! :)

On Feb.12.2010 at 08:41 AM

Larry W’s comment is:

I always say that the path rarely matters in a logo or re-design, but the final product does. If the point isn’t getting across in the end, it doesn’t matter and fails.

To that end… I’m torn.

I didn’t read the reasoning behind the cross-lines, but I think it works. It looks like its better at symbolizing two people in love… or spooning. I like spooning.

The “Love Puppy” is cool and works, too, and the fact that someone would have to write their own card is 100% smart.

I like the concepts here, but not so much the execution (Too web 2.0 for me), but I do dig it!

On Feb.12.2010 at 08:55 AM

rafe’s comment is:

What fun. Thanks.

On Feb.12.2010 at 09:04 AM

Alex P.’s comment is:

I think Pepsi would love this.

On Feb.12.2010 at 09:06 AM

kuratowa’s comment is:

You will never be my valentine.

That is priceless.

On Feb.12.2010 at 09:07 AM

refe’s comment is:

Love the updated color palette - I will be stealing it for my own valentines day gifts! However, the icon doesn’t exactly convey romance or love to me…

On Feb.12.2010 at 09:08 AM

abe’s comment is:

Don’t know exacty why but this is SO depressing

On Feb.12.2010 at 09:18 AM

Yeah’s comment is:

What a waste of energy. Oh god. How retarded.

On Feb.12.2010 at 09:20 AM

Matt’s comment is:

The process was fun… but I think it just went from one form of cheese, to another form of cheese. If Romance is supposed to be about honest love, where’s the honesty in the redesign? The puppy’s cute, but it would just act as another Hallmark selling tool.

I didn’t like the X until I saw it created using everyday objects..that was cute.

On Feb.12.2010 at 09:26 AM

Ivan’s comment is:

disaster. Looks like crossed wood sticks or …erm, vagina. Really, do we NEED an icon????

On Feb.12.2010 at 09:39 AM

Anders J. Svensson’s comment is:

I heart the cupids. Nice work, Amanda, Von, and Jessica!

On Feb.12.2010 at 09:41 AM

Britta’s comment is:

Your ideas are great! Love the thought that went into them, very inspiring.

On Feb.12.2010 at 09:50 AM

Sean Edison-Albright’s comment is:

I love the new icon, but that puppy looks like he’s humping a lampshade.

On Feb.12.2010 at 09:54 AM

barbara combs’s comment is:

Love your process! Maybe if you’d had longer than 2 weeks, you could have had more success though. The gray is a downer and the crossed “swords” don’t give the complete, rounded, happy feeling that the classic heart does. Love the Love Puppy as an alternate to cupid for sure…the worm not so much.

Good fuel for others to consider though. Would love to see this on a global design challenge-type scale.

On Feb.12.2010 at 10:12 AM

Dennis Van Staalduinen’s comment is:

Brilliant brilliant brilliant.

Okay, the radiating zombie puppy in a doggy-shag pose is just creepy, so you may never unseat cupid on that one, but the other stuff works for me.

On Feb.12.2010 at 10:15 AM

Juan Miguel Marin’s comment is:

Great exercise!

On Feb.12.2010 at 10:20 AM

Gregory’s comment is:

I think worms win out simply because Love Puppy looks like it’s humping a glass box full of butterflies.

On Feb.12.2010 at 10:31 AM

Glen’s comment is:

I think Pepsi would love this.

That was my first impression as well! This seemed eerily too reminiscent of Pepsi’s brief on trying to sell a poor concept.

On Feb.12.2010 at 10:37 AM

BJN’s comment is:

Looks like a mons pubis to me. Did you consider a “cameltoe” in your design exploration?

On Feb.12.2010 at 10:41 AM

cody milhouse’s comment is:

This looks more like Valentines day for the alternative set. It would never be adopted in the mainstream.

Very impressive though… but I concur that the “you will never be my valentine” and “we are not valentines” are a bit of a stretch and makes it all a bit confusing.

On Feb.12.2010 at 10:45 AM

Mojo’s comment is:

Focusing on the V is a mistake. Too many alternate meanings can be inferred. Vagina, Venereal, Vampire… And it definitely looks more like an X than a V.

Worms creep me out. Puppies with Xs flying out of their stomach like the Alien movie apparently does as well. Learn something new about myself every day.

On Feb.12.2010 at 10:48 AM

cody milhouse’s comment is:

This looks more like Valentines day for the alternative set. It would never be adopted in the mainstream.

Very impressive though… but I concur that the “you will never be my valentine” and “we are not valentines” are a bit of a stretch and makes it all a bit confusing.

On Feb.12.2010 at 10:50 AM

sita’s comment is:

At first I thought it was an anti-valentines day symbol. A big “X”. But I luv luv luv the puppy!

On Feb.12.2010 at 10:50 AM

Mojo’s comment is:

Focusing on the V is a mistake. Too many alternate meanings can be inferred. Vagina, Venereal, Vampire… And it definitely looks more like an X than a V.

Worms creep me out. Puppies with Xs flying out of their stomach like the Alien movie apparently do as well. Learn something new about myself every day.

On Feb.12.2010 at 10:52 AM

Johnny Griswold’s comment is:

Is it April 1st?

On Feb.12.2010 at 10:57 AM

Johnny Griswold’s comment is:

Is it April 1st?

On Feb.12.2010 at 11:00 AM

Jef Nickerson’s comment is:

J’adore the color pallette.

On Feb.12.2010 at 11:13 AM

qwertyale’s comment is:

Jesus
worms eating heart…

On Feb.12.2010 at 11:13 AM

Irving’s comment is:

X = kiss!

Also, the Valentine’s X calls to mind the back of an envelope, which might contain a Valentine or a love letter!

I think it’s great!

On Feb.12.2010 at 11:20 AM

Adam’s comment is:

“It’s a start” is a good description. I’m amazed at all the positive comments here. The icon especially doesn’t rise above the level of college student work.. the execution alone needs about two months of development. Sure, the existing Valentines look is kitchy, but at least it’s professional.

On Feb.12.2010 at 11:26 AM

Allison Z’s comment is:

The process was outstanding, very fun read.
Icon reminds me too much or a chromosome, rounded tips and the X shape I guess, especially when Love Puppy is spreading it’s love..literally!

On Feb.12.2010 at 11:38 AM

Jessie B. R.’s comment is:

This is brilliant. Thank you for putting the time in to transform dodgy ole Valentine’s Day. Thank you also for leaving us with the chocolate.

On Feb.12.2010 at 11:42 AM

Greg Scraper’s comment is:

I think it’s a satirical piece on how writing a creative brief makes any design decision seem legitimate.

Or it’s not, and I am a cynic. One or the other.

On Feb.12.2010 at 11:47 AM

Carlo’s comment is:

While I cannot deny how much I like the new V-shaped icon. I also cannot deny that there is a false conclusion from the beginning that a heart icon not being unique is problematic. That’s one important purpose for a cultural mark - for people to group related topics/themes; to see the heart and conclude “Herein lies passionate matters of the Heart”. I would argue that the sharing nature of Love is amplified more than it is cheapened by multiple entities sharing the heart icon.

But by all means let’s do away with the archetype of pale-blonde angel babies representing LOVE.

On Feb.12.2010 at 12:01 PM

Von Herwig’s comment is:

Is it just me, or does the mark look like a crotch of a gender-neutral doll? I’m not saying that’s a bad thing, or that it doesn’t suit the holiday. Just hadn’t seen it mentioned.

On Feb.12.2010 at 12:22 PM

Brendan’s comment is:

I really find some of these comments amusing. Guys, the current heart symbol has so much meaning because we’ve tied to much to it. This is a new symbol…if it became the symbol for Valentine’s Day, then in a generation you’d have people who are just as attached to it as you are to the current heart!

Hearing some of the cruder analogies is amusing, too. The current heart draws up all kinds of associations to the unmentionable.

Armin, this is an interesting study…you should do it for other holidays as the years go by.

On Feb.12.2010 at 12:23 PM

jason Parry’s comment is:

Loved the thinking… but think what was done was overly simplistic, except for the illustrations which were a little scary. I love old ink drawings of cupids i think it works well with idea of the arrow. As with christmas, there are good executions of the valentines brand and bad.

I think what is missing is examining the equity in the heart and cupid and not dismissing it just for the sake of a full redesign, as we should all do when redesigning identities.

On Feb.12.2010 at 12:27 PM

Monostereo’s comment is:

I loved the process and the iterations, but couldn’t get over negative connotations of the mark. Perhaps if there was more of a connection… if the two lines were tied together…. some sort of bow, or knot?

On Feb.12.2010 at 12:28 PM

John Kane Smith’s comment is:

Cool colors, the logo looks like a wishbone though. Makes me think of thanksgiving…

On Feb.12.2010 at 12:37 PM

ssscorvus’s comment is:

There’s no romance or warmth here, I agree with the comment saying that this looks like a valentine’s for the alternative set. Just looking at the logo out of context, it looks like two sticks or horns, anything but something that represents love.

On Feb.12.2010 at 01:02 PM

Luker’s comment is:

I wasn’t sure what to think of the redesign at first, but as I read all the comments, an opinion of my own started to form.

I have never liked Cupid. An angel baby that fires an archaic weapon at unsuspecting humans and somehow entices them to fall in love? The presentation of the love puppy pulled my nostalgic heartstrings with the ties to Care Bears. Also, a cute puppy seems more cute and feminine, which feels better suited to this holiday which is characteristically aimed towards the ladies.

But mostly, my feelings towards “The Valentine” are what morphed the most in the last 15
minutes. I started thinking: “That really doesn’t say romance to me”. Then I read all these comments talking about vaginas and the letter X. I can’t think of anything more characteristic of Passion or Sex than a euphemized ladypart. Not to mention an X is the international symbol of a kiss.

Still not a fan of the gray, but the magenta and burgandy work for me. So does chocolate.

On Feb.12.2010 at 01:05 PM

dezinegirl’s comment is:

I think you are hilariously clever!

On Feb.12.2010 at 01:43 PM

Alessandro Mingione’s comment is:

By the way, the “X” in many cultures means deny, refuse, “wrong”… I don’t see why you should base it on the heart when you can’t see it!
But it’s a good start, and a right thing to do.

On Feb.12.2010 at 01:44 PM

Brian’s comment is:

The logo looks like crossed sabers. Perhaps that’s apt, but it looks more like a logo Sadam Hussein would have used.

At least you got the chocolate right. It’s a fun project, though.

On Feb.12.2010 at 01:46 PM

semio’s comment is:

The problem that I have with the icon is … rather than it being a visual embodiment of one shared feeling, I see 2 very separate and distinct elements that don’t even seem to really like each other.

Unfortunately, I think the perfect Valentine’s mark was already created on a previous 360 redesign round, for the Gay Pride flag:

On Feb.12.2010 at 02:02 PM

Scary’s comment is:

It’s very hard to drag a tradition into your own age, and this particular one is failing in every single way. Simplifications of apparent associated schapes are ineffective, symbolism arbitrary and the total annihilation of the symbolic heart is too much to handle. Looks cheap and has e-card quality.

On Feb.12.2010 at 02:03 PM

Kirsty’s comment is:

I love the new logo! It also looks like a pair of noses nudging together which is not only very cute, but relevant aswell!

I completely agree with the Generic, Divisive, Stressful and Obnoxious aspects of the existing Valentines Day, and would like to say well done on the brilliant ideas youve brought.

Great Job!

On Feb.12.2010 at 02:09 PM

luv2draw’s comment is:

V is for Va Jay Jay Day! Sorry, I HATE IT!!!! Particularly, the cupid replacements. The creepy CVO, the penis-with-a-face worm, the emission-radiating puppy. WTF? How do any of them suggest romance?

On Feb.12.2010 at 02:21 PM

Mac’s comment is:

I really enjoyed this!

As the day in question was concocted for purely capitalistic reasons (of which I’m hardly opposed, but have never embraced because of the artifice), I’m not sure rebranding it is the full solve.

More than a rebranding, V-Day needs complete rethinking and repositioning.

On Feb.12.2010 at 02:26 PM

Joseph’s comment is:

This is incredibly disappointing. It’s an interesting concept, but has all but completely discarded any concept of warmth, love, or romance. Rather than solve the problem of commercialism and lack-of-feeling, it adds to it.

The “V” logo feels incredibly contrived and uninspired.

And as for ditching roses, that’s an interesting idea. But chili peppers and eggplant? Are you FREAKING serious? That has to be the most asinine thing I’ve ever heard. Imagine coming up to your significant other and handing her an eggplant. You’re more likely to get slapped than kissed.

The stationery is nice, as is the color scheme, but is hardly strong enough to be considered a “rebrand” of the holiday. I like the idea of the love puppy. The CVO is just stupid, though.

I like the concept of a project like this, but the results here feel like they ran with the first idea that popped in to their had without considering anything else.

On Feb.12.2010 at 02:58 PM

Juliana’s comment is:

horrible.

On Feb.12.2010 at 03:27 PM

Paulo Pereira’s comment is:

Now I remember why I don’t come to this site to often. All the negative comments - why are designers so f’in negative.

Bryony Gomez-Palacio & Armin Vit you should start a website called, ” I Can Do It Better!” -And invite all these designers filled with all this criticism to create something better. (Another possible name for the site could be, ” Put Up or Shut the F^CK UP!”)

On Feb.12.2010 at 03:36 PM

M.’s comment is:

“I think Pepsi would love this.”

Ouch! I’m not totally sold on this, but it’s nowhere near the Pepsi train wreck.

Besides, Pepsi spent $1 million and god knows how much time. NPR spent $0 and got it in two weeks.

On Feb.12.2010 at 03:46 PM

Ramsey’s comment is:

You guys sound ful of s@#t to me.

On Feb.12.2010 at 03:46 PM

raymond’s comment is:

It’s the X-Box 360 mark upside down.

Sorry.

On Feb.12.2010 at 04:33 PM

Raymond’s comment is:

On Feb.12.2010 at 04:45 PM

Chris’s comment is:

What an interesting exercise. The fact that you approached it like a real identity overhaul makes it much more compelling. A lot of sound thinking: creating the new symbol, making Valentine’s Day about couples exclusively, etc.

The only crit I would add is that the symbol does not seem to have enough weight on the page (though the traditional heart is pretty hard to beat on that front), and the symbol makes me think of the Cross Your Heart bra. Well, maybe that’s good thing.

On Feb.12.2010 at 05:32 PM

steven’s comment is:

To those who think the design is a bit too much like an “X” with it’s negative connotations, what do you think about this modification:

It shows the two halves “intertwined,” suggests holding hands, a bow on a gift, or even two swans, etc.
OR this,

In this version the two halves are just “kissing.”
In either case they avoid the immediate recognition of the “x” shape.
More interesting logo design stuff at http://bit.ly/6d84lJ

On Feb.12.2010 at 05:42 PM

Michael Kozakewich’s comment is:

I’m not sure about the foods. The idea behind roses is to get your partner something beautiful. The idea of flower genitals is a good one, so the saffron might work.

At any rate, what about cinnamon? Many valentines candies use cinnamon, so the link is already well-known. If not that, then ginger would work for that romantic spice.

I would think a thin bouquet of cinnamon sticks and saffron would make a fragrant and minimalist expression of love, and would last far longer than roses do.

As for Steven’s comment above, I’d say put a bit less curve at the top. The two lines shouldn’t be so close together that they become some obvious gimmick.

On Feb.12.2010 at 06:02 PM

morris’s comment is:

As has been mentioned above, the “heart” is loaded with cultural meaning. And anyone with a little whimsy and creativity — especially a couple, with their shared jokes, names for each other, etc. — should have no problem putting their own “spin” on, and enjoying, the traditional “kitschy” V-day trappings. Just swap a different kind of flower for roses; a different kind of snack (your loved one enjoys) for chocolate; etc. Millions of folks do this every year. This is how such cultural things work — you inherit a sturdy set of signifiers that you (and/or those who design greeting cards, etc.) play around with, to keep them “fresh” and make them “personal.”

This new proposed symbol makes V-day feel 1000x more “sterile” and “corporate.” That note paper couldn’t look LESS romantic!

The brief says: “Today’s mass-produced cards have lost all sense of romanticism.” Really? Just scroll through these (which I pulled up at random): http://www.papyrusonline.com/category/holidays/valentines+day+cards.do — many may not be your cup of tea, but they convey a diverse set of moods, flavors, etc. Much preferred — and
“meaningful,” to those who do happen to find themselves reflected in one (or several) — to the generic letterhead and “branding.”

On Feb.12.2010 at 06:02 PM

morris’s comment is:

P.S. — I’m not trying to sound like a jerk, and I understand the value of something like this as a design exercise. But to the extent the ideas in it are being presented seriously (and not just as a thought experiment), it deserves a serious response.

On Feb.12.2010 at 06:10 PM

debbie millman’s comment is:

MADLY IN LOVE!!!

On Feb.12.2010 at 06:28 PM

raymond’s comment is:

Regardless, it’s still the X-Box mark upside down. You should be more aware of popular marks/logos when designing one of your own.

On Feb.12.2010 at 06:40 PM

unfunction’s comment is:

I love it. Why? Because it’s fun. Plus it has many clever undertones. Good, fun design is meant to inspire, and this mark inspires me to draw a line and see if my other half will complete the “V” with me.

Oh and speaking of fun, you know what would be a fun little exercise?
http://www.engadget.com/2010/02/02/were-turning-comments-off-for-a-bit/
… just sayin…

Anyway, let’s be honest. We all know this is what Valentines Day means for guys:

On Feb.12.2010 at 08:28 PM

RP’s comment is:

I thought the concept would be interesting, but you lost me on goal one. Love is for everyone. I’m not interested in ideas that perpetuate the bitterness that so many people seem to feel just because they’re single. That just makes me sad and I don’t wanna put up with that. Love yourself, love your friends, love everyone around you. THAT is what Valentine’s day means to me and that’s what I see with the people I care about.

On Feb.12.2010 at 08:28 PM

Rachel’s comment is:

It’s interesting to me that the suggestions for alternatives to roses, which “come all the way from Colombia — hello carbon footprint” are all things that would probably be shipped at least that distance to North American consumers at this time of year. Perhaps some people in the southern tier would have eggplants, okra, papaya, or chili peppers growing in greenhouses, but it seems unlikely. Most of these alternatives would have equally large footprints. Interestingly enough, if that were really a special occasion - if, for example, you really gave a chocolate on Valentine’s day and didn’t just eat some chocolate every day - then I think it might be a pretty lovely gesture to get something that special for your loved one on Valentine’s day. However, since so many of us are eating food from halfway around the world at this time of year without thinking twice about it, maybe we should look for flowers and food that come up at this time in North America…perhaps a return to the Crocus, which was part of the very first Valentines (but the versions growing in our own yard, not those in India providing Saffron).

I like a number of the other suggestions, including the dog, the colors, the idea of the logo, and the card tax! Fun to see some design ideas on the subject.

On Feb.12.2010 at 09:07 PM

Rachel’s comment is:

Oh, and asparagus, too, with lots of butter.

On Feb.12.2010 at 09:12 PM

roundedsquare’s comment is:

Yes to the Puppy. Thank you for getting rid of teddy bears.

Big Yes to the infinitely more sophisticated color scheme.

Yes to keeping chocolate, and the suggestions of saffron, chili peppers, eggplant. Partial on ginger, can take it or leave it. Really don’t see anything sexy or enticing about okra (it’s slimy and oily, even though very tasty) and durian (have you ever smelled one? If I dare give that to my girlfriend, she’ll probably throw it at me. That is, once she regains consciousness after a puke-induced black out.) I get the aphrodisiac aspect, but in that case, why don’t you put oysters in there instead? More fun and playful, has the connotation of luxury (and a potential pearl inside? ;))

I need to see a flower in there though. Have never been a big fan of roses myself, but I do like giving flowers (though not on Valentine’s which I refuse to “celebrate”,) and can definitely understand the desire to receive them.

Which brings me to the icon. I see where you’re going, but it’s too much of an X, and all its negative connotations. It will just not fly. Ever. The different meaning of the icon based on rotation is too gimmicky in my opinion. This is the toughest part without a doubt as how can you update a heart? I personally would be happy with a stylized V, but whatever it ends up being, the one big criteria I have for it is that it must be a shape that can be drawn in one continuous line. Think of all the teenage girls who doodle hearts in their school notebooks: they’re not going to start creating intricate shapes, it needs to be something that can be done repeatedly and easily, and at the same time, something that can have a personal touch (as is the case now with pinching/rounding the bottom of the heart, adding twirls or curves, crossing the lines at the top, etc.)

Good job, it’s in the right direction…

On Feb.13.2010 at 01:57 AM

unnikrishna menon damodaran’s comment is:

re-designed look and feel seems to be serious!. a thought about replacing heart and colour red is refreshing! grey is cool but bit lost the warmth. “V” or crossing pink and grey swords: friend or foe!
best,
umd

On Feb.13.2010 at 02:50 AM

jipples’s comment is:

Err and?

You are sharing this with us because…?

On Feb.13.2010 at 05:04 AM

goobernutz’s comment is:

I think you’re missing a trick here. You’ve come so close, but didn’t quite pull it all together. My suggestion is to merge two of your icons, the love worms and heart puppy. To come up with the ultimate symbol of lurve…

The Heartworm Puppy!

Love makes you feel sick.
Heatworms make puppies sick.

A broken heart makes you feel like dying.
Puppies really DO die when they have heartworm.

It’s so simple, yet brilliant. Go with it! I want it on my desk by Friday.

On Feb.13.2010 at 05:55 AM

Req’s comment is:

I’d have gone for a Venn diagram for a logo. How simple is that!? And maybe a butterfly instead of a dog or a worm.

On Feb.13.2010 at 07:07 AM

J Nichols’s comment is:

The process was interesting and well thought out, but I’m not “feeling” the end product at all. Good color choice though

On Feb.13.2010 at 07:34 AM

Sasi’s comment is:

Sometimes you just cannot break away from traditional and commercial signs. Valentine is about love, love is in our heart. A heart is a heart. Cupid is cupid, a puppy is cute but not cupid, though I like the illustration, the whole concept seems a bit strained to me.

There is a misunderstood, the heart icon is as simple icon as global icons, whatever global icons mean…

On Feb.13.2010 at 08:31 AM

MSGDS’s comment is:

Interesting exercise, but sorry, the X doesn’t work. Steven had a much better solution. I like the Love Puppy and the new color palette excellent. Get rid of the worm.

On Feb.13.2010 at 08:41 AM

Insanemoe’s comment is:

Look Soulassassins.com logo

On Feb.13.2010 at 11:41 AM

John’s comment is:

PARTY POOPER ALERT!

I’m sorry, but I find exercises such as this to be self-indulgent, self-congratulatory and borderline inane.

On Feb.13.2010 at 12:47 PM

soubriquet’s comment is:

Fail on every count.

This is a great example of failed rebranding.
The designer thinks it’s great.
The client thinks it’s cool, the public says “What?”.

This one won’t fly.

On Feb.13.2010 at 01:47 PM

Nicholas Kastner’s comment is:

Seriously? Designers are talking about LeBron moving to NY?

Not gonna happen… and the fact that it is even still speculated (especially by the least likely demographic) annoys me.

New York is not the center of the world anymore, in design and basketball…

On Feb.13.2010 at 02:37 PM

felix sockwell’s comment is:

brown alert to party poopers:

its just an excercize. if it made you think outside
the usual candy-filled heart-shaped box, it worked.

On Feb.13.2010 at 03:01 PM

scarabic’s comment is:

I think this is ridiculous. We’ve all seen marketers talk themselves in circles until they come to a crazy conclusion only a crazy marketer could possibly believe. Here we have a designer doing the same thing. Really, is this a joke? If so, the joke’s on me.

On Feb.13.2010 at 03:04 PM

DK Holland’s comment is:

Didn’t Pentagram redesign Christmas for Kurt Anderson’s Studio 360?

Some projects should be rejected as unnecessary, out of respect for the client’s time and money. And yours.

Perhaps Anderson should be saved from his own folly.

Worms? puppies? Psychotic delivery guys?

I think the heart is just dandy (although isn’t it an ancient german symbol for a woman’s butt in the air?). Me, I avoid Valentine’s Day like the plague.

On Feb.13.2010 at 04:35 PM

coyr’s comment is:

Yes, it’s an “X” and you can’t change that iconic simbol :)

On Feb.13.2010 at 07:34 PM

Me’s comment is:

It sort of looks like 2 guys touching dicks. Maybe this could be good for an “other” valentines day.

no homo.

On Feb.13.2010 at 10:41 PM

Johannes’s comment is:

Good read. I think the new symbol is great because of it’s flexibility. Either a V or X, maybe even a H or K. Easy to draw for with a pen, and the best of all is that it is perfect for further development. Most symbols are constantly but slowly changing.

On Feb.13.2010 at 11:12 PM

Kerstin’s comment is:

Steven, your suggested changes are fantastic! Much better than the original idea. I vote for one of your concepts.

On Feb.14.2010 at 02:17 AM

Amanda’s comment is:

I don’t understand why everyone is getting all bent out of shape about this. I enjoyed the presentation- I thought it was pretty amusing, too. Relax people, it’s all in good fun. Just an exercise. Shit!

However Armin, I have to say, few people would prefer durian to roses :)

On Feb.14.2010 at 04:14 AM

Tapeg’s comment is:

I remember something about “if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it.” Well, the heart thing ain’t broke, but if it were then two l’il sticks crossed at the bottom wouldn’t do the trick. Too evocative of a campfire symbol.

Puppy (minus the X-rayed belly) is cute, but the look-&-feel is hokey. The magenta palette works.

BTW, Happy Valentine’s Day. ;)

On Feb.14.2010 at 05:02 AM

erik spiekermann’s comment is:

I’m sorry, but I find exercises such as this to be self-indulgent, self-congratulatory and borderline inane.

Of course it is! Never meant to be anything else. And I thought us Germans were the ones without a sense of humour! This is very funny presentation, totally taking the piss out of all the corporate stuff we do all day. Brilliant story-telling. I cannot believe people here are criticizing it like their lives depended on it. It’s only graphic design. No real clients were harmed in the process, and the carbon footprint is zero.

I just hope that T-mobile don’t come after you. Here in Europe they have been suing people just for using magenta, which they think they own. And they’ve often won!

On Feb.14.2010 at 07:01 AM

jimbo’s comment is:

Poop!

On Feb.14.2010 at 10:27 AM

NoLove’s comment is:

This is a joke right?…

However, excellent logo Anti-Valentine folks. Hallmark should take advantage of the market!

On Feb.14.2010 at 10:34 AM

Laurie’s comment is:

It sounded better on the radio. As executed, FAIL. The “X” logo conveys nothing. Puppy, good idea; execution, bland and boring. Get rid of pink, good idea; magenta, horrible - worse than pink - and the combination with gray is icky in a corporate sort of way. Looks like a hospital waiting room. Hiring a firm was a mistake.

On Feb.14.2010 at 10:59 AM

Bronek Gracz’s comment is:

How about that:

Source: http://hanne-bronek.broneg.pl/

On Feb.14.2010 at 11:00 AM

Alfonso’s comment is:

This is a great exercise, and your execution is certainly interesting because it raises questions. But one thing jumps out at me as downright fascist: The Valentine Card Tax.

Whether you are a fiscal conservative or a tax-loving über liberal, taxing a product for no reason better than “because I think it’s ugly and in such bad taste” is nothing if not fascist. In fact, I think it is about as un-American as you can get: To punish people for not submitting to your standards of taste, for not giving the way you think they should give, for not “showing they care” the way you think they should “show they care”? And all for what, so that a few designers (an undeniable minority in our society) can feel a little better about about their craft as they forcefully inject a bit of good taste into a silly holiday whose very purpose in the first place is to generate sales during a month that was traditionally slow for retailers around the country?

I understand this is only an exercise, and not an actual tax that will actually be passed as law, but the mere suggestion is a reminder that designers don’t necessarily know best, and that no amount of good taste can justify the imposition of a “taste standard” by the taste elite upon the tasteless masses, above all things, regardless of people’s right to purchase ugly shit for their loved ones on Valentine’s Day.

At the very least, call it what it is: The “Screw Liberty In the Face, Pretty Products Are More Important” Valentine Card Tax.

On Feb.14.2010 at 11:03 AM

Bronek Gracz’s comment is:

BTW this potato is still on my desk. Contact me if you want to hire him :P

On Feb.14.2010 at 11:15 AM

Chris Rugen’s comment is:

I love this exercise! I’m the resulting mark for my V-Day card this year. Its simplicity reminds me of the beautiful elegance of the Icthys (the Jesus fish). While not a Christian myself, I appreciate the story of its use and how it isn’t complete without two people’s participation. Seems very relevant to this mark.*

Bravo, Armin and Byrony.

*And a reason why the bumper versions are all so lame and contrary to its original intent.

On Feb.14.2010 at 01:05 PM

Clyde’s comment is:

Superb you guys! I love the process and the results!

On Feb.14.2010 at 01:06 PM

Wisteriam’s comment is:

I’m with Sam. X marks the wrist.

On Feb.14.2010 at 01:15 PM

Flaherty’s comment is:

With all due respect… .

Not digging it.

On Feb.14.2010 at 09:26 PM

a.’s comment is:

nice effort and i think v-day could use some redesigning, but i think you guys overdid it. which is an easy mistake to make when tackling a redesign - what to keep and what to change? the desire of most designers tends towards change, since we want to leave our mark. it’s much harder to actually keep some portion of an old design yet still update it in a coherent way. i think that’s the challenge of any redesign.

also, i agree with many that the v-day logo you’ve designed brings to mind crossed swords or crossed bones from a pirate flag. the heart is a beautiful, well-known icon for v-day; you could keep it - especially in the simple version you included in your post, very modern! and i also am not digging the black/grey. i think you could keep the red, such a lovely color, but add the magenta to the red as a way of updating it. just some ideas. good effort though!

On Feb.14.2010 at 10:09 PM

Julia’s comment is:

Love it!

On Feb.15.2010 at 02:36 AM

Lone’s comment is:

Valentines is a poor and bias foundation to base this redesign on considering the essentially universal value and recognition of this symbol that has little or nothing to do with the holiday.
The heart is utterly distinct in form, primitively perfect with zero confusion about it, by itself or near other symbols. And being so basic removing any part of it (ie cutting it in half) makes it meaningless. Trying to reevaluate it, not just as a form but as an actual symbol (big difference), is like pushing a square block into a round hole. You might wear it down over time so that it fits but it’ll be an uphill climb all the way (which usually translates into unnecessary). All in all a topic far too broad to fit into a narrow project.

On Feb.15.2010 at 03:16 AM

Baseline Shift’s comment is:

I think you already came up with a good symbol earlier on in the process with the venn diagram. The three ages of love - youthful and free (magenta), sensible and middle aged (burgundy), old and faded (grey); the same goes for womens lingerie.

On Feb.15.2010 at 05:56 AM

jonjo’s comment is:

even the crappest clip-art available online is better than any element of your concept.

sorry,

On Feb.15.2010 at 07:33 AM

m.’s comment is:

horrible!! it looks like a cross. and cross = death. not to mention, s.valentine’s day IS a cheesy holiday, so it make sense to have all of those kitschy cards and stuff. and about that V up, V down… the V left/right looks like the math symbol ‘is less than’, ‘is greater than’. and the mascots are terrible too.

On Feb.15.2010 at 08:59 AM

Warren’s comment is:

This reminds me of the “Buddy Christ” concept from that one Kevin Smith movie.

A problem that did not need solving, not in the least. The problem doesn’t lie at all with the core elements of the existing imagery, it lies with the saccharine and trite renditions of those symbols and images. It’s not something that needs a core design revamp. Anyone could do a better job with a cupid or a heart than the 6 examples listed.

The heart works as a symbol for love because it’s a centuries old symbol. Symbols like the AIDS ribbon, biohazard warning and the Coca-Cola logo are much younger. Attempts to replace them now would be equally ineffective. It’s much easier to introduce new visuals for a new thing, than to replace an established visual.

On Feb.15.2010 at 11:57 AM

Stephen’s comment is:

LOL, this is humorous. I think the logo unfunction posted might get my vote.

I can’t help but to think of a “reverse peace sign” when I see “The Valentine”

On Feb.15.2010 at 01:22 PM

Rachel’s comment is:

Fun!

I appreciate the “roses have to go,” but you failed to acknowledge that chocolate comes from a zillion miles away and is harvested by slaves as well. They are the SAME.

On Feb.15.2010 at 02:02 PM

debbie’s comment is:

I can’t believe so many of you are seeing the x as a cross and therefore negative and not as a kiss which is perfect for valentines day. I think that just shows that you are all negative people and therefore probably not gonna like any valentines redesign.

On Feb.15.2010 at 02:18 PM

Anonymous’s comment is:

nah, not really working for me either, the more I look at the “X” i just see Miffy’s nose

On further inspection of the finished “X” symbol, it looks more like an abstraction of a peace dove flying towards the viewer, so something with christian religious overtones, not a non-denominational love/romance symbolism.

Or it can also be an abstracted butterfly, but again not immediatly regonisable as a symbol of love, more a symbol of nature, something ephemeral, something temporary

You’ve also missed out on the meaning of the symbol, it’s a heart whether it looks like one or not the original is known as a “heart”, so has a whole cloud of meanings outside of it being a pictorial symbol simply for its verbal dictionary meaning

I actually quite like what you did with the colour study as being somehow more symbolically relevant, 2 parts joining to become one, 2 parts “kissing”, possible union/”copulation” … think this would be a better way forward

On Feb.15.2010 at 03:39 PM

BrittanyF’s comment is:

I like most of these ideas for the most part. I however, don’t care about the new icon for Valentines Day. I LOVE the cute little puppy figure as the new “cupid”, I think that is much more practical than a baby with a bow and arrow. The new color scheme is nice as well, I’m not much of a red person so I always tell my boyfriend to get pink flowers. As for the X looking like a V or upside down V as a symbol of if you are taken or not isn’t that clever.

I think that Valentines Day is just like any other day. I think that if you are truly in love with someone you do not need a day to tell them. You should tell them and shower them with gifts everyday, you should not need a day just to tell someone you love them. I do celebrate it, but we normally do not do anythings spectacular, just dinner and some chocolate is fine by me.

On Feb.15.2010 at 07:34 PM

BrittanyF’s comment is:

I like most of these ideas for the most part. I however, don’t care about the new icon for Valentines Day. I LOVE the cute little puppy figure as the new “cupid”, I think that is much more practical than a baby with a bow and arrow. The new color scheme is nice as well, I’m not much of a red person so I always tell my boyfriend to get pink flowers. As for the X looking like a V or upside down V as a symbol of if you are taken or not isn’t that clever.

I think that Valentines Day is just like any other day. I think that if you are truly in love with someone you do not need a day to tell them. You should tell them and shower them with gifts everyday, you should not need a day just to tell someone you love them. I do celebrate it, but we normally do not do anythings spectacular, just dinner and some chocolate is fine by me.

On Feb.15.2010 at 07:38 PM

James Potter’s comment is:

I appreciate this thoughtful design for the new Valentine’s logo, and its versatility, but will someone please explain the alternative power of the letter “x” to these designers? (I concede this is based on my mostly American experience of iconography) While impressed by their imaginative scenarios to use it in, I could not ignore the large “X” my mind was seeing and thinking: “Survery says?!…. EHHHHH!!” or other rejection messages associated with this powerfully negative icon (again, at least in American popular culture). I was hoping my association with hugs and kisses, i.e. “XOXO” might overpower the negativity element, but it couldn’t compete. I’m sure with some imagination I can relate it to other ideas, but this really jumps out at me, and says “NO”. Kind of reminds me of the introduction of the Chevrolet “NOVA” in Latin American markets.

Great, imaginative work, and I can rarely say no to puppies (maybe not X-emitting radioactive zombie dog), though I suggest the designers step back a bit further or conduct a small focus group before putting so much energy into one idea.

James

On Feb.16.2010 at 12:28 PM

James Potter’s comment is:

I appreciate this thoughtful design for the new Valentine’s logo, and its versatility, but will someone please explain the alternative power of the letter “x” to these designers? (I concede this is based on my mostly American experience of iconography) While impressed by their imaginative scenarios to use it in, I could not ignore the large “X” my mind was seeing and thinking: “Survery says?!…. EHHHHH!!” or other rejection messages associated with this powerfully negative icon (again, at least in American popular culture). I was hoping my association with hugs and kisses, i.e. “XOXO” might overpower the negativity element, but it couldn’t compete. I’m sure with some imagination I can relate it to other ideas, but this really jumps out at me, and says “NO”. Kind of reminds me of the introduction of the Chevrolet “NOVA” in Latin American markets.

Great, imaginative work, and I can rarely say no to puppies (maybe not X-emitting radioactive zombie dog), though I suggest the designers step back a bit further or conduct a small focus group before putting so much energy into one idea.

James

On Feb.16.2010 at 12:38 PM

James Potter’s comment is:

I appreciate this thoughtful design for the new Valentine’s logo, and its versatility, but will someone please explain the alternative power of the letter “x” to these designers? (I concede this is based on my mostly American experience of iconography) While impressed by their imaginative scenarios to use it in, I could not ignore the large “X” my mind was seeing and thinking: “Survery says?!…. EHHHHH!!” or other rejection messages associated with this powerfully negative icon (again, at least in American popular culture). I was hoping my association with hugs and kisses, i.e. “XOXO” might overpower the negativity element, but it couldn’t compete. I’m sure with some imagination I can relate it to other ideas, but this really jumps out at me, and says “NO”. Kind of reminds me of the introduction of the Chevrolet “NOVA” in Latin American markets.

Great, imaginative work, and I can rarely say no to puppies (maybe to an X-emitting radioactive zombie dog), though I suggest the designers step back a bit further or conduct a small focus group before putting so much energy into one idea.

James

On Feb.16.2010 at 12:39 PM

James Potter’s comment is:

I appreciate this thoughtful design for the new Valentine’s logo, and its versatility, but will someone please explain the alternative power of the letter “x” to these designers? (I concede this is based on my mostly American experience of iconography) While impressed by their imaginative scenarios to use it in, I could not ignore the large “X” my mind was seeing and thinking: “Survery says?!…. EHHHHH!!” or other rejection messages associated with this powerfully negative icon (again, at least in American popular culture). I was hoping my association with hugs and kisses, i.e. “XOXO” might overpower the negativity element, but it couldn’t compete. I’m sure with some imagination I can relate it to other ideas, but this really jumps out at me, and says “NO”. Kind of reminds me of the introduction of the Chevrolet “NOVA” in Latin American markets.

Great, imaginative work, and I can rarely say no to puppies (maybe to an X-emitting radioactive zombie dog), though I suggest the designers step back a bit further or conduct a small focus group before putting so much energy into one idea.

James

On Feb.16.2010 at 04:02 PM

James Potter’s comment is:

sorry guys had some connection issues and #500 errors, didn’t mean to beat a dead horse here

On Feb.16.2010 at 11:19 PM

michelle’s comment is:

Are we being punk’d?

This post (especially the “re-interpreted” versions of the symbol) seems like it might be a big spoof of that obnoxious Pepsi brief that was leaked last year.

On Feb.18.2010 at 01:04 PM

Cedric’s comment is:

I think you all a buch of assholes and the whole crap sucks. (please respect my opinion.thanks.)

On Feb.19.2010 at 07:31 AM

Kate’s comment is:

I was somewhat intrigued by the idea of refreshing V-Day celebrations, tho’ I never tire of pink-red-white.
But I can’t get past your basic premise— that single, unmatched people have no right to Valentine’s Day. Tsk tsk!! I can’t tell you how wrong that is. February 14th IS a day to celebrate all affections. Anyone— even a single and nondating woman— can have a wonderful time making sure that every friend and worthy acquaintance gets a nod of appreciation. A heart-shaped or chocolate nod, if practicable. THIS approach feels great, believe me— and you don’t need wishbone shapes or designer colors, just a warm heart and a twinkle in your eye. Happy Day!

ps— on second look, some of your concepts seem downright meanspirited.

On Feb.19.2010 at 12:27 PM

Sheffield United fan’s comment is:

The valentine ‘v’ looks very similar to the cross cutlass used in Sheffield United’s crest:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sheffield_United_F.C.

On Feb.20.2010 at 04:26 AM

alessandra’s comment is:

i love the new colors!!!

On Feb.20.2010 at 02:08 PM

O Bloody Hell’s comment is:

re: “The alternate cupid”, you need another option, “none of the above”. None of the three does much for me, sorry. Like the icon, hate the cupids.

On Feb.23.2010 at 03:06 PM

Dan’s comment is:

Where’s the passion? Where’s the fun? Where’s the hopeless romantic? Love is cheesy, and it’s fun, it’s boundless and spontaneous, colourful and full of wonder and amazement.

This logo totally condradicts all of those things. It’s stiff, boring, cold and just plain ugly. Whoever designed it needs to get out more.

On Feb.23.2010 at 04:59 PM

Peter Korchnak’s comment is:

Love the idea, but the logo looks like the “Turn shuffle on” icon in Windows Media Player. No love lost there.

On Mar.01.2010 at 02:05 PM

Izola Petitt’s comment is:

It’s picturing the perspective from both. It’s attempting to say, if the girls did the identical thing, how would the boy feel. Then, the guy was in reality flirting with some other girl from the starting signal but was played as a girl playing with different guys, in the words, from a girl position as a pig. That’s why in the conclusion, the guy was the actual pig.

On Mar.03.2010 at 07:03 PM

Marianne Blackburn’s comment is:

The Love Puppy would make a great lamp! It could be like a bat signal for when you’re in the mood! ;D Ha Ha

On Mar.04.2010 at 01:19 PM

dheer’s comment is:

The supporting color is pink, in many hues…yuck.

the pink is loveble color for ever.

On Mar.04.2010 at 09:59 PM

graphicbeacon’s comment is:

I appreciate the time youve taken to research and develop the icon, which in my view is the lesson we need to take from this - constructive research

The heart has become too recognisable to be replaced. Your suggestion is a bit too vague and it resembles a lot of double sword pirate logos.

The heart cannot be changed for it is a timeless piece - one of the components of good pictorial image design. It’s like trying to replace the Nike logo - its almost impossible.

On Mar.17.2010 at 12:47 PM

Louhead’s comment is:

Not feeling the new logo. I think it’s just TOO absract. Not exactly original, and it loses a lot of it’s intended meaning with it being so simple. Everything else, especially the card tax, is intriging.

On Mar.17.2010 at 04:10 PM

Izzy’s comment is:

Your Valentine isn’t “as simple as” other universal designs. It’s even simpler, to the point of being boring. It looks all right printed on a notepad, but in any other context it’s just blah.

I do like the combination of magenta and grey, though I’d rather have it on a dress or a birthday card than anything Valentiney.

Maybe I’m taking this too seriously. Anything that ignores EVERY OTHER FLOWER ON EARTH when looking for a replacement for roses is probably some form of satire, or something. Not to mention “pink… yuck.”

On Mar.21.2010 at 10:08 AM

Budgeting Guy’s comment is:

As a want-to-be designer I thought the study was fascinating. I listened to the Studio360 show a while back and just now checked out the website. I thought it was a very coherent presentation.

I particularly liked the post it notes and use of color. They do provide a more sophisticated palette to valentines day. I liked the logo, but thought it looked too much like the basic Illustrator or Photoshop brush was used (with the rounded edges). I’d love to see it with the edges touched up to give it a more polished look.

On May.05.2010 at 05:17 PM

Rafael Santoya’s comment is:

Surely the latest rumours about Delonte and Lebron’s mom couldn’t be true.. I mean, could they?!

On May.24.2010 at 06:39 AM

oceangirlcollection’s comment is:

I agree that the whole valentine thing has to be redone. Because all it really brings to my mind when I think of it is a commercial. I don’t like the pink- it’s very girly..not that girly is bad- but it excludes men or people who are turned off by pink….it should not be one particular color- that’s the trap we fell into all these years and what makes it so unreal to me. While it is true that the images shown here are static and not very warm, it’s a step in the right direction because it forcing me to think ’ what would be better?’
thanks.

On Jun.13.2010 at 12:17 PM

Pink Magic USP Labs’s comment is:

Hey - nice write-up. Well I have finally come to terms with the whole preposterous LBJ situation. What a joke! 1st, Lebron fakes his elbow injury and blows off the playoffs to make this all easier to go down. Next, they create a complete media circus with it all and everyone gets sick of him before it even happens. After that, he goes on national TV to stab his hometown in the back, all while upsetting every other big city except Miami, so that he can play on someone else’s team! Talk about stupid marketing! Anyhow… cool site - I’m subscribed to your RSS feed now so I’ll be checking in regularly!

On Jul.19.2010 at 12:36 PM